Replies

"ID might be called a hypothesis but certainly not a theory. A theory is well-established, having survived repeated testing via the scientific method. The reason so many take umbrage to ID is that its proponents put forth no testable hypotheses, yet offer all sorts of conclusions."

Where to start?! First of all, just because *you* haven't researched something doesn't mean that something doesn't exist or isn't a certain way.

In this case, ID is the *only* theory that explains the origin of transgenic lab animals such as pigs that are genetically designed to grow human growth hormones.

Second, as far as "testable hypotheses" go, ID is testable and falsifiable (no bias means no ID) whereas it is Evolutionary Theory that has no published, peer-reviewed falsification criteria.

So enjoy eating your crow. You've earned it.

Second, as far as "testable hypotheses" go, ID is testable and falsifiable

So give us some falsifiable hypotheses. Tell us how you would test them. I have seen a couple of so-called hypotheses from ID people but they were not in fact testable.

it is Evolutionary Theory that has no published, peer-reviewed falsification criteria.

Now that is an ignorant statement. You haven't a clue what you are talking about.

Here is a testable hypothesis for you. Working with Bacteria Strain XYZ, you hypothesize that there will be no change over time in its susceptibility to Drug ABC. That's the null hypothesis, SOP in biological science. But as you do your experiment, the data force you to reject the null hypothesis. The bacteria shows increasing resistance to the drug over time.

The logical interpretation? The bacteria have been evolving so as to adapt to the environment to which you have placed them. Evidence of evolution--of the falsifiable variety.

BTW, are you sure you know how natural selection is defined? I will take a wild guess that there is a good chance you might not.

In this case, ID is the *only* theory that explains the origin of transgenic lab animals such as pigs that are genetically designed to grow human growth hormones.

Is it your contention that initial intelligent design of biological organisms is demonstrated by our ability to subsequently manipulate the component parts of biological organisms in a lab?